Now the Right is Mentally Defective

Whew…. Another very long day at the Weapon household. A 14 hour work day on top of making sure Mrs. Weapon stays as comfortable as possible during recovery. I want to take a moment to thank all of you who have wished us well and sent along messages each day with support and prayers. It is so encouraging to have so many people, even those who are diametrically opposed politically, who you feel really care about what happens in your real world. As an update, Mrs. Weapon is doing well, still in a lot of pain, but getting better. With any luck, we will have a full recovery and she will be back to writing me “honey-do” lists in no time. Recovery is expected to take about 4 weeks, so we are almost through the first one. However this long day left me with little time tonight. But as I was reading some news and stuff, this article stood out to me. So I figured I would share the article with a few thoughts from me scattered in between.

It seems to me that the Huffington Post, while offering what I think is a left leaning, but fair account of things from that happen, employs some folks who are simply off the reservation with the madness that they spout. I already spent some time exposing a extremely partisan fruitcake over there in Bob Cesca (who’s incoherent ramblings about Baucus’s farce of a bill would be so much better without his bitter partisanship clouding every single sentence he writes). And now I will take aim at another writer over there, because I found this article, written as though it is an actual psychological analysis, to show how desperately in need of a psychiatrist some of those on the left can be. This time it is clinical psychologist Bryant Welch. And he sees the folks questioning things on the right as mentally ill and brainwashed. I will let you all decide what you think:

Why Obama Had to Have Been Born in Kenya

Bryant Welch

Why are there so many “crazies” coming out of the woodwork to attack public officials with their views that defy reality? And why are they so angrily insistent on those views?

As a psychologist I believe the answers to these two questions have profound significance for our nation’s mental health and will determine whether America will have the mental capacity to confront the increasingly complex challenges that confront us. (I simply wonder, Mr. Welch, whether you were asking these same questions when the “crazies” were out doing the exact same things to President Bush? Were you questioning the mental capacity of those who claimed George Bush brought the Twin Towers down? I didn’t think so.)

Of course we know these people are lied to by increasingly effective and ruthless Republican strategists operating in patriotic sounding front organizations. They are indoctrinated 24 hours a day by Fox News and proselytized to by the Religious Right. (This might have been the line that caught my attention the most. I am willing to admit that Fox News is skewed these days. But are you really going to attempt to say that those on the left aren’t indoctrinated 24 hours a day by MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS, The Huffington Post, and proselytized to by the socialist “greater good” movement? Get a grip sir and take a look in the mirror at your own side before thou starts casting any stones)

But that still takes our “why” question only so far. What is it about the mind that makes so many people accept a reality that is so much at odds with the reality that we hold? There is nothing subjective about the reality issues in play here. Obama was born in Hawaii and there are no death squads in Obama’s plan. So what gives? (No there are no death squads, but there are things that in a worst case scenario could lead to government panels making life and death decisions, regardless of how much the left and the media attempt to ignore what is written there) (And by the way, by “What is it about the mind that makes so many people accept a reality that is so much at odds with the reality that we hold,” did you mean like the false reality that everyone is a racist, or that insurance companies are supposed to be a charity organization, or that nationalized health care actually works, or that man actually causes global warming and can do something about it? Which one of these false realities are you talking about?)

If this article is any indication, this book has zero redeeming value in the world of ration and logic

In a recent book, I tried to answer these “why” questions from a psychologist’s perspective. Here is the most succinct way I have been able to articulate it.

Reality

We take our sense of what is real and what is not real for granted. We shouldn’t. We each actually form our own unique “reality sense” with our mind that assimilates an infinitely complex bombardment of stimuli from outside us and from within. It is no simple task, and the most miraculous part of the human mind is that it is able to create a coherent reality at all.

The problem is that in times of extreme uncertainty the mind has a hard time creating this reality sense. The mind becomes confused. This can be caused by external events in our world, such as rapid change or inner psychological states — for example, when we are experiencing strong emotions like paranoia, envy, or challenges to our sexual identity. (Well that would certainly explain the positions of the far right AND THE FAR LEFT)

In this state of confusion, the mind does not do very well at all. When it feels sufficiently uncertain about what is real and what is not real, it panics. Ultimately the mind will fragment if it is not able to create a cohesive reality sense with a reassuring sense of what is real and what is not real. The breakdown in this ability to form a coherent reality sense is the primary difference between sanity and madness. Thus, it is not too surprising that for many people it is more important to have some reality sense than it is to have a correct reality sense. Of course, people differ greatly in their ability to tolerate ambiguity and in their ability to create a reality sense in times of stress. But for someone in an acute state of uncertainty, it is any port in a storm when it comes to reality formation.

And this is where things go awry. Current right-wing politics is an art form that is designed to re-define reality for a class of people who are increasingly unable to establish their own sense of reality. Instead, they succumb and become increasingly dependent on someone else to tell them what is real and what is not real. In their regressed psychological state, under certain conditions, many people will accept as real whatever they are told by an authoritative sounding figure be it Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, or Bill O’Reilly. (Current Left-wing politics is an art form that is designed to re-define reality for a class of people who are increasingly unable to DEAL with what is really reality. Instead, they succumb and become increasingly dependent on someone else to tell them what is real and who’s fault it is that they are not getting ahead. In this state, many people will accept as real whatever they are told by an authoritative sounding figure be it Nancy Pelosi, Keith Olbermann, Timothy Geithner, or Barack Obama)

Yes... I can see the Psychosis You are Talking about!

And the more people lean on these people to provide that function, the more dependent they become on them, and the less able they are to think for themselves. (Amen Brother. Oh, you meant the people on the right…. sorry)As this process continues people will accept ever more outrageous ideas. Death squads in health care? Obama secretly born in Kenya? Okay. (As this process continues people will accept ever more outrageous ideas. The rich are hoarding all the wealth and don’t deserve what they earn. Freedom and liberty should be sacrificed for some bizarre concept of “the greater good,” or even something as crazy as Cap and Trade will work to stop global warming and will not result in energy prices skyrocketing. Okay.)

The value people like Limbaugh and O’Reilly have for these people is that without them people simply cannot make sense of their world. They are in a state of confusion unless and until someone offers them a reality that “explains” things enough that they at least feel they understand what is going on in the world. Only then is their panic and anxiety abated. (The value people like Obama and Pelosi have for these people is that without them people simply cannot make sense of the fact that they cannot simply quit their jobs and expect others to pay their way. They are in a state of confusion until someone offers them a reality that “explains” things in a way that reinforces to them that none of their failures are any fault of their own. Only then is their self worth and trust in government restored)

The “reality” sense they are handed has to be simple enough that they can readily understand it. The devil was one of the earliest bogeymen for a reason. We create a “devil box” and everything that needs explanation comes from the devil box.(And I submit to you that you have explained this part very well. The “devil box” is currently both “the rich” and those “evil white racists”)

I can see why Welch is upset with pictures of a President liked to Hitler. Troubling mental aspects, indeed.

So if you paint a Hitler-like mustache on a picture of Obama and toss in the word “socialist” things begin to make sense and come into a focus no matter how distorted that “focus” is. (Again did you have the same “psychological assessmeent” when they called Bush Hitler and had “fascist” on the sign?) Again, it is better to have a reality sense that is wrong than to have no reality sense at all. In the latter case one enters a state of complete fragmentation or madness.

The portrayal of someone, in this case Obama, as the devil incarnate serves multiple functions. It organizes a person’s world by explaining so much so simply, and it also offers an explanation of why the person has been feeling so apprehensive. They were not afraid of their own psychological fragmentation. Instead, the danger is external in the form of Obama. Better the enemy be outside of oneself than inside oneself. (I really hope by this point, Mr. Welch, that you are not so silly as to not see that you can apply this same analysis to the folks on the left. Because they don’t point to a single person doesn’t eliminate the fact that the left has done a great job of painting “the rich” and “capitalism” as their version of the devil incarnate)

And, of course, if Obama is a foreigner from Kenya their fear is much more understandable and helpful in arranging our inner world. The “birthers'” insistence on their reality, even in the face of Obama’s birth verification from Hawaii and the copy of the newspaper announcement of his birth, reflects the deep psychological need these people have to maintain the view of reality that was handed to them. Once their reality is established people are reluctant to retrace the steps of uncertainty that has led them to their illogical position. To do so they have to traverse their route back through the uncertainty they were trying to escape in the first place. (again, a phenomenal explanation of the psychosis of the far left in America. They are not willing to apply reason to their arguments against “earned wealth” or “capitalism”. Excellent point that they aren’t even willing to retrace their steps to find the point where they left the path of reason)

Strategy

Get this man some help NOW! Dr. Welch, can you help him?

And make no mistake about it, the conservative element in America has a very good understanding of how this process works inside the mind, the critical sense of timing it requires, and how one must deliver the powerful messages in repetitive depth charges to the human mind. (You simply fascinate me with your ability to describe to a tee the liberal movement in America. Timing has been everything, and no one knows better the importance of a unified message being drilled into people’s head better than the Liberal strategists and media folks who take part in that daily morning conference call with Rahm Emanuel and James Carville)

The democrats are still lagging very far behind in this regard and still think the public is engaged in a substantive discussion of the issues. They ignore the reality of the human mind time and time again. (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL… Sorry I simply couldn’t help myself here. The Democrats are lagging behind? They have done a PHENOMENAL job of brainwashing a mindless American public. And the far left has understood the meaning of the word reality since the early 1900’s)

There are two critical elements to this form of “reality” politics. One is timing. The other is certainty. To exploit this vulnerability in the mind, the time to strike is at the very first moment of uncertainty that people feel, before they have formed any reality of their own and before they become attached to anyone else’s view of reality. This is why the swift-boating was so effective. John Kerry was “unfit to lead” before he even introduced himself to the American public. (It is also why the redistribution of wealth targeting was so effective. Americans were at the mercy of mean old Wall Street before the month of September ended. Superb timing indeed sir)

With the current health care debate, a black man is offering a government designed health care plan that is largely undefined. Health care is too complicated and confusing for most people anyway, and Obama is a “foreigner.” Latent paranoid fears and uncertainty are not hard to understand. In such a state, many people are receptive to anyone who presents him or herself with a strong angry argument that organizes their world and gives some extrinsic explanation for the anxiety they are feeling. Anger is a tremendous organizer. Angry people may not think clearly, but they are very certain of themselves. This is what we are seeing in the town hall meetings. (It is also what we saw at the polls last November. Anger at Bush got Obama elected. Are you denying that Obama was tapping solely into the paranoid madness that is the American sentiment of the rich white men are hoarding all the money and keeping the rest of us from succeeding. Jesus, dude, you really are not that bright to have a psychology degree)

So what should progressives do? Do we have to be like the far right and beat them at their own game? No, not at all. But we do have to hoist them on their own petard. We have to expose the manipulations and the manipulators with a torrential counterattack that is focused on the manipulations, not a message that emphasizes some irrelevant “positive” message such as how important health reform is. (And this is exactly what the far right needs to do to combat the absolute craziness on the far left. The only problem is they don’t have the media on their side as well. A troubling obstacle. But you know what? The far left will eventually lose anyway because even mentally challenged folks know a losing proposition when they see it)

Instead, we need to harness the rage that is ubiquitous in this country because of all the uncertainty and the confusion. That is the energy that is driving health care and most political life in America at the present time. We need to harness it for constructive purposes, exposing the puppeteers and the corporate interests that are behind them (I suggest that before you go this route, you check the campaign contributions of your majority party, including your President. You might be surprised to find their pockets are equally filled by THOSE EXACT SAME PUPPETEERS AND CORPORATE INTERESTS). Health care is ultimately a populist issue, but we are not igniting the populist rage that drives all populism. Until progressives learn this lesson they will lose. (Or perhaps you need to understand that a majority of the population doesn’t support your bullshit health care reform plan, hence why the “populist issue” isn’t so popular)

Those Pollyannas who thought that with Obama’s election progressives had won were very naïve. If we learn nothing else from the birthers and the deathers, if we learn that we must work with the deeper strata of the human mind, it will be an invaluable lesson.

Bryant Welch is a clinical psychologist and attorney. He is the author of State of Confusion: Political Manipulation and the Assault on the American Mind (St. Martin’s Press, 2008).

OK so there it is. Something a bit easier for me on a tough day. But you have to admit that reading this guy’s explanations really does apply as much to the freakshow that is the far left as it does to the freakshow that is the far right. I know this ended up being a bit petty, but every now and then you have to call out those that spout absolute nonsense and expose them for what they are. When the left gets to the point where psychologists are coming out and writing articles stating that those opposed to Obama are clinically “mental”, I think it is fair to say that we have crossed the line. This article was complete nonsense from a man who is too smart (according to his degree anyway) to not see the absolute contradictions and connections that were present. It took me, a guy who is NOT a clinical psychologist, all of a half hour to add the comments in that show the absolute absurdity of his using this argument against the far right.

I wouldn’t have given this the time of day. Purely one sided and an attempt to sell in a bare market. He missed the part about conservatives all being hunters as a sign of their deep seeded hatred for the family dog. Pathetic.

I really couldn’t even get through the bulldookey that the man was writing.

From what I did read, he sounded like the interview between Keith O’Dunderheadman and Janeane Girraffofalo (after the tea parties) where she looked like a crazed post-lobotamic mental patient half-firing on lithium and a few amoeba cells that make-up her brain, screeching and attempting to explain the human limbic brain and how it relates to red-necks and racists that attended tea parties on 4/15/09.

I’ll try to read your article again later in the day provided I’m able to obtain some fortitude — trying to drink some massive amounts of coffee so that I can get to the same nervous and paranoid plane that this man is on!

Hey, I think the nut jobs on the left are as unbalanced as the nut jobs on the right.. just thought I’d get that out there.

The one thing I will say is that, when it was the crazy left that was comparing Bush to Hitler, the media (all of them) were observing that they were unpatriotic and putting our troops in danger etc by not supporting the commander in chief in a time of war. While certainly the crazy right is now getting raked over the coals now, it is by no means a new and one-sided phenomenon. That said, I think both sides strive for hyperbole in order to get media attention and the media eats it up.

Favorite, not only. I get my news from all over the place. BBC, MSN, BBG, Fox, Stewart, CNN, this site, drudge, WSJ, and huffinton to name a few.

And if that’s the most disturbing thing you’ve seen me say, you haven’t been reading all of my posts, so here you go: Obama ain’t so bad, welfare is good, some amount socialism isn’t bad either, Keynes right about a lot of things, you can’t solve all the world’s problems with military occupation, abortion isn’t murder, religion (especially organized religion) is dangerous, right wing lunatics are every bit as bad and plentiful as left wing lunatics, Obama was born in Hawaii, 9/11 wasn’t an inside job but could have been prevented, buying gold won’t protect you if the economy collapses totally, global warming is real and man-made (or at least sped up by us) and we should be doing more to try to stem it, financial regulations are good and there should be more of them and better enforcement, and (let’s see if this sets off any explosions) taxes should be higher. That should be sufficient for now.

And if that’s the most disturbing thing you’ve seen me say, you haven’t been reading all of my posts, so here you go: Obama ain’t so bad [he’s more useless than the last moron; at least Bush could get his party in line], welfare is good[necessary is a better word than good], some amount socialism isn’t bad either[agree], Keynes right about a lot of things, you can’t solve all the world’s problems with military occupation[check], abortion isn’t murder[it is murder, but that should be the woman’s choice anyway], religion (especially organized religion) is dangerous[check], right wing lunatics are every bit as bad and plentiful as left wing lunatics[check], Obama was born in Hawaii[check], 9/11 wasn’t an inside job but could have been prevented[don’t agree; nobody would’ve seen that coming/and it was Clinton’s lack of response that encouraged them to try it], buying gold won’t protect you if the economy collapses totally[no clue], global warming is real and man-made (or at least sped up by us)[maybe, probably, so what? You can regulate the world] and we should be doing more to try to stem it[in-house, sure], financial regulations are good and there should be more of them and better enforcement[check], and (let’s see if this sets off any explosions) taxes should be higher[check]. That should be sufficient for now.

Keith Olbermann claimed that town hallers were “contributing to this climate of paranoia and violence enveloping our political system,” conveniently leaving out the fact that the majority of violent incidents at town halls were perpetrated by those on the left. As noted by the Weekly Standard,

Despite the left’s insistence on the essentially barbaric nature of Obamacare critics, the video, photographic, and police report evidence is fairly clear in showing that 7 of the 10 incidents were perpetrated by Obama supporters and union members on Obama critics.

Bias at the Times is very important. In his book, “Bias”, Bernie Goldberg
explains how news organizations use the Times to decide what stories to cover. Her you have an example where 40 protesters were given more coverage than the hundreds of thousands, or millions who protested in DC last weekend.

“During the 2008 presidential campaign, the Times protected ACORN against accusations about illegal collusion between it and the Obama campaign. A February 18, 2009 Metro section story portrayed ACORN as a bottom-up citizens group conducting a new civil rights “resistance movement” against unfair foreclosures, with no ideological labels. And in March, a “bus tour” protest of the homes of AIG executives in Connecticut led by an ACORN front group (a fact not mentioned in the Times) garnered a full story in the paper, although it numbered a grand total of 40 people.”

+ Here is what The Kraft Homepage has to say about where Kool-Aid sales:

+ Based on per capita sales, KOOL-AID is most popular in Memphis,
+ Tennessee. The other top five cities are (in order) Little Rock,
+ St. Louis, Oklahoma City, and Jacksonville, Florida. (all in US)
+ Today, one glass of KOOL-AID – which cost less than a penny a glass
+ back in 1927 – is still a bargain, costing less than a nickel a
+ glass and beating the rate of inflation since 1947!
+ KOOL-AID is certainly an All-American favorite. So it’s no surprise
+ that more KOOL-AID is sold the week right before and the week after
+ the 4th of July than any other period during the year.
+ More than 563 million gallons of KOOL-AID are consumed each year,
+ with more than 225 million gallons in the summer. In other words,
+ 17 gallons of KOOL-AID are consumed every second during the summer
+ season!
+ If all the envelopes of KOOL-AID sold in a year were laid end-to-end,
+ they would stretch 58,524 miles, which would wrap around the Earth’s
+ equator twice – or between Los Angeles and New York more than 20
+ times!

This Dr. Welch guy is a total psych-tard. It sounds like he is offering a rationalization to the reader. He is filling in the blanks, trying to make sense of something he doesn’t understand…or he is well aware of reality and is trying to fill in the blanks for the reader who he feels is confused in these troubling times. He’s using his expertise to lend creditibility to his rationalization, and simotaneously doing exactly what he accuses Fox News, Limbaugh and O’Reilly of doing. He gives no credit to the reader OR the adversary in terms of their capacity for independant critical thinking. Who does he think he’s kidding?

Agree. Good article USW. The left, especially those in the media will not apply their own standards to themselves. The hard left is just as responsible as the hard right for stopping health care reform. And that extends to nearly all issues by our government.

By the way, USW, you need to come on down this weekend. The City of Fort Worth is sponsoring a trap and skeet shoot and pistol match to raise money for the poor and hungry, through the Police Bike Patrol. Last year we had over 500 shooters and raised over $50,000. This year promises to be bigger.

ahhhh…the smell of cordite and powder in the air. But then again, I forgot that I am a right wing gun nut and raising money this way may be considered un-American…..but it is TEXAS.

Glad Mrs. Weapon is doing well. A bit of advice, walk as much, as soon as she is able. After a hernia operation, six weeks recovery the norm, I was back at work
(desk only)in six days, playing limited golf in four weeks. It had a real effect on the pain level, allowing faster recovery.

Yeap…LOI is giving great advice…Had my GB surgery on Wednesday, was at baseball practice on Thursday, Baseball game on Friday and Saturday and back to work on Monday…

Mrs. Weapon…look to it as a challenge…! Getting up and getting back into normal activities (within reason) really does make a difference!!!!! Don’t let Mr. Weapon take you dancing right away though!!!!

A man feared his wife wasn’t hearing as well as she used to and he thought she might need a hearing aid. Not quite sure how to approach her on the subject, he called the family doctor to discuss the problem. The Doctor told him there is a simple informal test the husband could perform to give the doctor a better idea about her hearing loss.

Here’s what you do,” said the Doctor. “Stand about 40 feet away from her, and say something in a normal conversational speaking tone see if she hears you. If not, go to 30 feet, then 20 feet, and so on until you get a response.”

That evening, his wife is in the kitchen cooking dinner, and he was in the den. He says to himself, “I’m about 40 feet away, let’s see what happens.” Then in a normal tone he asks, “Honey, what’s for dinner?”

No response.

So the husband moves closer to the kitchen, about 30 feet from his wife and repeats,”Honey, what’s for dinner ?”

Still no response.

Next he moves into the dining room where he is about 20 feet from his wife and asks, “Honey, what’s for dinner ?”

Again he gets no response.

So, he walks up to the kitchen door, about 10 feet away. “Honey, what’s for dinner ?”

After a President has been in office for 6 months it is customary for the last President to send a note of congratulations to the new one.

So yesterday when the note came from Bush to Obama, the President was somewhat troubled because it was written in code and all it said was: 370H-SSV-0773H

This troubled him as he had always heard from his peers how former president Bush was perceived to have been scholarly challenged.

So he took the note to his wife. She was unable to decipher it. They called in the VP, and he was unable to decode the message. They called in the chief of staff and the head of Secret Service detail and they were unable to determine the meaning of the note. Next he called in the head of the Senate and Speaker of the House. They both were mystified by the meaning of the coded message. Now there was complete panic in the oval office. They called all of their contacts in the media and sent copies of the note to all of them, and not one was able to come up with an answer. A special emergency meeting was called by the staff. All branches of the military, counter intelligence, CIA, FBI were called in, and the best minds were unable crack the code.

After a sleepless night, a now humbled President picked up the phone and called the former president, and asked him the meaning of the note.

I realize this is off topic, but I simply cannot bring myself to even comment on crap like that written by Mr. Welch.

Matt,

abortion isn’t murder

I’m curious how you defend this position.

Here are my thoughts.

A baby (call it a fetus if you want) is a human being, totally innocent. Killing said baby for an reason other than to save the mother’s life (possibly rape as well) is taking an innocent life for no good reason. That is by definition, murder.

For people to fully support abortion, it is necessary to believe that it is not murder. You see, no one believes that murder is a good thing, but some people believe that abortion is a good thing, so to simultaneously believe that it IS murder and yet it is still a good thing would cause too much inter-brainial conflict. To believe that it is NOT murder is necessary in order to believe that it is an acceptable practice.

I don’t really have time today to get into this, but here goes the cliff notes version:

What makes a “thing” a human?

Possible answers:
(A)DNA
(B)Soul
(C)Capacity for higher reasoning
(D)Capacity to develop into a human
(E)All (innocent) life is sacred
(F)Your actions are the reason it exists, therefore you’re responsible

Reasons I reject these (in order):
(A)Your skin isn’t a person. Yes, I know, it’s the same DNA as you, so what about cancer? It has it’s own DNA. Still not a human.
(B)I reject this concept as religion w/o scientific evidence. Show me proof of a soul and that a fetus has one and we’ll talk.
(C)It has none. Nor, for that matter does an infant, so maybe this is a really poor metric..
(D)Yes, this is the tricky one. Yes, if left to its own devices (and given a free ride on the nutrients of the mother for 9 months), it may eventually become a human. But so, by this logic may every sperm and egg. The difference is that they must come into contact. So then, let us consider another species. Consider the shark. A female shark can, in isolation, produce male offspring. No male is necessarily required, the egg will self-divide and grow by itself. Should, then, a shark’s egg be considered a shark? Other species are capable of this (and there is at least one recorded instance of this happening in humans). So then, should every human egg be considered a person because it might possibly survive to adulthood? If so, is every ovulation a loss of life? This is complicated and I will be happy to get into it with you next week once my project is over.
(E)So it’s a moral evil to put a dog to sleep? If you can’t afford it or whatnot and nobody else can or will take it (perhaps it’s greedy and takes your nutrients without asking, keeps you up at night and randomly kicks you in the stomach), you should be obligated to keep it alive?
(F)Also tricky, but consider this. If you build your house next to a homeless shelter and leave a lot of food outside, and a homeless man wanders onto your yard demanding food, you would be perfectly justified kicking him out even if it meant that he would starve to death. Your actions (building your house there) are the reason he’s there but you might have some obligation due to a perceived offer to feed him. have no obligation to him. Using birth control is the same as putting a fence around your house. The bum still might get in, but now you have a strong case for kicking him out. He is a parasite that you took appropriate precautions to avoid and caught anyway, you may evict him.

Oh, and it’s not so innocent. It’s stealing from you and you have a right to defend yourself. Does the fact that it doesn’t know any better make it ok?

Also what about those that for whatever reason do not mature mentally or phsyically past the stage or infancy.

How is saying a human 1 week past conception is less human than one at 9 months past conception any different from saying a 2 year old is less human than a 28 year old.
How and where do we draw a line?

You better listen to Black Flag, and JAC, for I really learned a lesson from them yesterday. No need to go into that now. But you are so wrong to think that abortion is not murder. Take what Seed said to heart, because he is right.

You don’t really want to me go off on you about abortion do you? I am 100% against abortion, and to think for some to say that it’s not murder had better take a long hard look at a developing baby, and say it isn’t a human.

It is most assuredly a homo sapien, no? That means human to us normal folk.

. So then, should every human egg be considered a person because it might possibly survive to adulthood?

I think it is quite reasonable to protect a baby which is already progressing rapidly to birth while not extending such protection to an egg, though the potential does exist. In the case of a baby, the potential is being carried out, not merely existing.

So it’s a moral evil to put a dog to sleep?

Unless the dog is dying or has attacked someone, yes, it is. We have laws that protect animals from violence and cruelty.

Using birth control is the same as putting a fence around your house. The bum still might get in, but now you have a strong case for kicking him out. He is a parasite that you took appropriate precautions to avoid and caught anyway, you may evict him.

Using birth control is not 100% effective. It says so on the label. If you choose to have sex using contraceptives, you are taking the chance that they may not work. IT IS NOT AN EXCUSE TO KILL A BABY! Personal responsibility 101.

I understand you are busy, but you have not proven that a baby is not a human. I don’t believe you can. I look forward to possible future conversations on the topic.

Of course it cannot be proven that a human zygote or human embryo is not a human. To attempt to do so is, of course, not sane.

Oh, and by the way, no one reads the label, and no one ever heard of personal responsibility anymore, so pointing to these common-sense arguments to support your point is a futile as trying to resist the Borg 🙂

Oh, and one more thing… the baby that was just conceived 10 seconds ago is just as human as that 90-year-old in a hospice bed with severe alzheimers. However, it is ok to kill either one of them (or both of them) if you don’t want them around. At least, that is what House Bill 3200 says…

For now, I will just say this as a simple statement of my opinion (which I will attempt to back up with arguments next time): A “thing” that is genetically a member of the Homo Sapiens Sapiens species, is a human (with all attendant rights and obligations) only when that “thing” may want such for itself.

Now, we’ve been here before where I make such an outrageous statement and the logical conclusions are terrifying and counter-intuitive and have the appearance of condoning what you might consider evil. Does that mean that a brain-dead coma patient is a human? No. It is a piece of meat kept animate by machinery. Does that mean we get to just pull the plug at will? No. The person, the thing that made them a person (ie their conscious mind), is dead. As such, their body becomes someone else’s possession. That person may decide whether to pull the plug or not. Let’s take it a step further. What if the person has severe dementia. If the person is still aware of their own existence (and just how does one establish this? I would suggest erring on the side of caution), then they still are a person, but if not (as my grandfather was for many years after being diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease), he is not a person anymore. Does that mean that I should be able to euthanize my grandfather? Absolutely. I wish I could have. He died many years before he died, he spent the last few years of his “life” staring at a blank wall while his body degenerated. My grandfather was funny and interesting and I loved him, but this thing was not my grandfather, just his mortal remains – he was long gone.

It is the mind that makes us different, the mind which separates us from the animals. This, and this alone, sets us apart. Cheetahs are faster, bears are stronger, fish swim better, eagles see better, sharks smell better (have a better sense of smell), dogs hear better, cat fish taste better (have a better sense of taste and are delicious). In every category, we are surpassed by nature except for one. We are the smart ones. We think. That is why our lives are sacrosanct. If it were anything else, then animals would be more than human, their lives more sacrosanct than ours.

So is a fetus entitled to it’s life? No. It is not aware of its own existence. It cannot think. It has no brain. It lacks the fundamental thing which is essential to being human. A baby is aware, it reacts to its environment – so, for that matter, does a late stage fetus. They are humans. A multi-cellular blob, regardless of its DNA, is not.

So the next question you’re about to hit me with is about the mentally retarded. And the answer here is yes and no. Though I am completely ill-suited to make the determination, a downs child still thinks, he/she is a human being worth of protection. But someone with severe mental retardation and an IQ approximating a squirrel? No. They are a meat sack in the same way that a car without an engine is not a means of transportation.

This is harsh and I recognize that it will offend the sensibilities of many people here. I apologize for that. Nonetheless, I stand by my convictions. Again, I have spent far too much time here today, but we can hash this out another time. If you can convince me, I will happily join your cause, otherwise, I hope you will join me in favoring the rights of human women infected by parasites with human DNA over the rights of a few cells.

First of all, your are so wrong in saying that ( I hate the word fetus ), so I will say baby. Where did you get the idea that a developing baby does not have a brain? It starts it’s development as soon as conception takes place. By the 4th to 5th week, fingers and toes develop, heart begins to beat by the 3rd week, face starts to from by the 6th week, by the 8th week, that baby is pretty much developed, all it needs to is grow.

Before it’s born, it sucks it’s thumb, practices it’s breathing, protects it’s self against light, hears it’s mother’s heart beat, can even hear outside the womb, can hear it’s mother’s voice, can hear music, and it can feel every single thing that being done to it during an abortion.

Don’t tell me that a baby does not have feeling, you’d be wrong, because it does. It can feel when it’s being cut up, saline solution being poured on it, can feel when it’s brain is being punctured. Don’t tell me they have no feeling. I lost 2 babies, one in the 4rth month, and one in the 5th month, and they were fully developed, just needed to grow. So unless you can prove to me your theory , don’t even bother to say what you did.

Now, as for the Dementia thing, My mother has it. Does that make her unhuman? She can still think, still make decisions for herself, although not always rash ones. She has her favorite Tv shows, favorite foods, things she likes and dislikes. Because she has dementia, should I take her out back and shoot her? She is 87 years old, and live with me and my family, comes to work with me everyday. She enjoys being around people just as much as the next person. I’m sorry about your grandfather, but not all Dementia people have it that bad, and quite possibly might not ever get that bad.

As for Down Syndrome, and Mentally Retarded people, there is a difference. I had a cousin who was mentally retarded. Mentality of a 3 year old, but was a person none the less. She had her certain things she liked to do, and things she didn’t like. Yes, her parents had to make decisions for her, because she was unable too.

We have some friends who have a down syndrome daughter. She is able to live on her own, go to school, hold down a job, and do all the things that a normal person does, probably in some way even better. She is still human is she not. She still has feelings,d does she not. Should her mother have aborted her just because she has down syndrome? Her mother chose not to do that. She knew that her daughter would have it, but would not all conscience get an abortion.

So, yes, You offended me with you thinking there. Perhaps you should do a little studying first before you put your words down.

If you see my post above, you will note that I say specifically that downs does not make you less than a person. “[A] downs child still thinks, he/she is a human being worth[y] of protection.”

I also say “[a] baby is aware, it reacts to its environment – so, for that matter, does a late stage fetus. They are humans.” So the your cousin with the mentality of a 3 year old would certainly fall into this category. That she is handicapped (and I am sorry to hear this), is a tragedy, but by no means one which denies here the status of human being.

With regards to your mother (first of all, I am sorry to hear of her condition as well), the fact that she enjoys her shows and can function at any level says to me that she is a person. “If the person is still aware of their own existence (and just how does one establish this? I would suggest erring on the side of caution), then they still are a person” My grandfather, as I said, stared blankly at a wall for several years, that is not “living” – there is a substantive difference.

At no point do I advocate for aborting downs children because they are downs children. I say that, before their brain advances to a point where they are aware (and, you’ll note, that I make no claim as to when that is exactly), they have no rights.

That said, I did misspeak (mistype) when I said have a brain. Yes, they have begin developing a “brain” at an extremely early age, but it is a while before it could match the intelligence of your average rodent. A blob of cells is not a person.

I am sorry for the offense, but I feel I was pretty clearly misunderstood here. There is certainly plenty of grounds for legitimate grievance, but I do not think your above comments accurately portray my sentiments.

Okay, so I misunderstood some your post, but I do not like the fact, that you call a person with an IQ of a squirrel a meat sack, That I really resent, why, because they are still human. And just so you know, my cousin passed away about 4 years ago at the age of 60.

As for your comment about a blob of cells is not human, there again, you are wrong. Once the egg and sperm meet, it begins on the journey of development. Once conception occurs, everything begins to fall into place.

When I lost my first baby at 4 months, it was because my cervix was too weak at the time, and the doctor had no idea about that until it was too late. Can’t know those things before hand. When I lost my second one at 5 months, it was because her central nervous system wasn’t developing properly, through no fault of hers.

All I ask, is that you be careful when you write your words down, please stop and think first and ask yourself, if it will offend anybody.

I take great offense when someone speaks about a baby and abortion in the same sentence. For the hell I went through to have my two son’s, I think I have that right, to feel and speak the way I do. Unless you’ve been there, please be careful with what you say, that’s all I ask.

You must understand that I am not speaking about even a child as young as 3 months. Though I am no expert, I am inclined to believe that my theoretical cutoff would be far earlier than that. Nor am I speaking about low functioning people.

Again, I apologize for the offense. My views are, I understand, out of the mainstream, and my tact occasionally requires some work.

GREAT JUDY, YOU DO SO WELL, I AM VERY PROUD TO BE A FEMALE AS YOU ARE, I HAD A BABY, NOT MARRIED, HE IS NOW A FIREFIGHTER, SAVES PEOPLE AS WELL AS HOMES, WHERE WOULD THE PEOPLE AND HOMES BE IF I HAD KILLED HIM.?????????

There will always be trouble with trying to define “worthy of life” at any point other than a clear and definite change of state.

Before conception, no individual human (although very tiny) with its own unique DNA exists, only an egg and lots of sperm. Conception is a very clear and definite event. It is a change of state. After conception, the tiny human develops and grows very rapidly in utero until he or she is ready to be born. Sometimes something stops the baby growing, like a miscarriage, and the baby dies. However, there is no clear and definite change of state during gestation. The tiny individual gradually “looks” more and more human. He or she is alive, however, and has been alive since conception. We know this because when people decide to stop that life they must take action to stop it. When they stop the life they have killed a living individual.

If the baby does not die or is not killed while in the womb, he or she is born. That’s another significant event that results in a change in state. While in utero, the baby is getting its nourishment directly from the mother. But he or she is not the same as the mother. The baby is not a cancer or a tissue but a unique individual, ALIVE unless something kills him or her. The baby’s birth is the second definite change in state (and in location).

When the baby is born, he or she is still dependent upon one or more others for nourishment. If the baby is properly cared for and nothing interrupts his or her life, he or she will grow into an adult and (hopefully) provide for himself or herself. We put arbitrary markers on a life such as birthdays, potty training, driver license, and so forth, but none mark such a significant change in state as conception. A child in diapers is a lot more trouble than a responsible four-year-old (who even remembers to flush sometimes), but he or she is not more or less human.

Eventually the individual will probably grow old and may become dependent upon others as he or she was in infancy. If properly cared for, the old person will live until he or she dies a natural death. That’s the third change.

You seem to have stated that at some subjective point, in certain circumstances, living humans are not worthy of life. These circumstances seem to be related to how much trouble the humans are causing, or are expected to cause, for other humans. If I’m not mistaken, you approve actions to interrupt that life. By what right? By size and age? The mother of an “unwanted” baby is larger, stronger, and older. If she wants to, do you believe she ought to be able to kill the baby? The relative of an “unwanted, troublesome, and costly” senior citizen is younger, stronger, and has other things to do with his or her money and time. Should the relative therefore be entitled to kill the senior citizen?

I am sorry that your grandfather’s mind did not last as long as his body. However, there is incredible danger in deciding that someone else’s life has no value, while that individual is alive! Changes of state occur naturally and should be allowed to do so.

There are excellent and effective methods for making certain that unwanted children are not conceived. Anyone who decides to engage in the activity that produces a child assumes the risk of producing said child and should not be able to end the child’s life at any stage after the life has begun.

The end of life begins to look really scary for those of us who have seen relatives degenerate. I believe we still must not put them to death. We should take care to make our own wishes known so that we don’t end up getting unwanted treatment AND that we get the treatment we do want.

Y’all have demonstrated a very high standard for articulate writing on this blog during the many months that I have been reading it. Usually all the discussions are complete, or nearly so, by the time I can read them. I appreciate the opportunity.

There is a big difference between a baby (fetus) and a demented person. A baby has the potential to think, to live, breathe, want, need, etc. I cannot understand why someone would quash a life, so full of potential, just because they made a mistake or changed there mind or are uncomfortable. It is absolutely disgusting and reprehensible. Like you said, we’ll hash this out later.

USW…….I took your post, read that article, and applied that to my non scientific poll that is now complete. I do not really know how the brainwashing aspect fits in relative to this but I will post the results and a couple of questions and the answers that pertains to race and the health care. Hope this is not too far off base to your subject matter today but I think it is related.

Caucasian Interviews were broken down into Union, Non Union, and Professional workers. Union workers were interviewed at the Arlington General Motors Plant and Lockheed Plants. Non Union workers were interviewed at the same plants (Texas is open shop) and interviewed at local shops such as grocery clerks, administrative, etc. Professional interviews were teachers, lawyers, accountants, etc.

Union – 64
Non-Union – 48
Professional – 30 Total 142

African American Interviews were broken down into Union, Non Union, and Professional workers. Union workers were interviewed at the Arlington General Motors Plant and Lockheed Plants. Non Union workers were interviewed at the same plants (Texas is open shop) and interviewed at local shops such as grocery clerks, administrative, etc. Professional interviews were teachers, lawyers, accountants, etc.

Union – 94
Non-Union – 37
Professional – 20 Total 151
Hispanic Interviews were broken down into Union, Non Union, and Professional workers. Union workers were interviewed at the Arlington General Motors Plant and Lockheed Plants. Non Union workers were interviewed at the same plants (Texas is open shop) and interviewed at local shops such as grocery clerks, administrative, etc. Professional interviews were teachers, lawyers, accountants, etc.

Union – 96
Non-Union – 34
Professional – 9 Total 139

Asian, American Indian, and others were broken down into Union, Non Union, and Professional workers. Union workers were interviewed at the Arlington General Motors Plant and Lockheed Plants. Non Union workers were interviewed at the same plants (Texas is open shop) and interviewed at local shops such as grocery clerks, administrative, etc. Professional interviews were teachers, lawyers, accountants, etc.

Union – 4
Non-Union – 38
Professional – 0 Total 42

Note: Interviews specifically were aimed at the General Motors Plants in Arlington, Texas and the Lockheed Aircraft Plant in Fort Worth, Texas for both union and non union members. The thought process was that the Machinist union and the UAW union members would be most likely the same train of thought throughout the United States given they are large nationwide unions with the same line of thought. I do understand that Texas is an open shop state and union membership is not compulsory. No science employed here, just a sampling of the DFW area. Some of the non-union stats were local employees in grocer’s and other similar lines of endeavor.

The Professional members were mostly teachers and lawyers and accountants. We specifically excluded shop owners and President’s, executive VP’s, and the like to try to get more main stream as far as Texas goes. The average age was 42.9 years. I will not list all the questions here because of the size but a couple that I hope fits your criteria the last three days.

Note: Texas carried McCain about 61% and since Texas is largely rural, except DFW, Houston, and San Antonio, the percentages above are what I hoped to be mainly working class. It is quite clear that the more administrative (computer technology) carried higher McCain but that is why I excluded them. I was surprised to see such a high percentage of Asian, American Indian, and others for McCain.

Question: Do you support a National Health insurance program ?

Caucasian – 92% no
African American – 86% no
Hispanic – 87% no
Other – 96% no

Observation is that everyone already has health insurance and does not want it messed up. What was interesting is that the same percentage also understands that emergency health is readily available. In addition, I was surprised to learn that quite a few have actually read HR3200 (or said they did) and were cognizant of the fact that while keeping their current insurance, they knew they would lose it 4 years later. I was very surprised to find out how many were also cognizant of the cost and the impact upon the economy. The union line personnel did not surprise me as much as the teachers did. I expected a more pro Obama approach, given the fact that most of the teachers interviewed were African American.

Question: If you voted for Obama, would you vote the same way again today as in November?

Not much to extrapolate here. To most, race is not an issue and remember, this is Texas. We are considered backward and southern even though we do not claim southern heritage. Texas was sharply divided on the Civil War and preferred to remain a Republic.

There were a host of other questions but do not want to burden more than I have on USW’s hospitality. Now, how does this fit with the brainwashing theory?

The inter-continental missile shield was not needed anyway. No loss there. He, instead, redirected the money to the intermediate and short range missile system and that work is immediate….and will move them closer to the Russian border in the process. The new missile initiative is supposedly to let Iran know that we are serious….now this is laughable. Obama does not have a serious bone in his body as it pertains to our security.

Now, someone tell me, where is our security threatened by putting a short and intermediate range missile system next to Iran? What will this prove? Let Europe protect itself from Iran. Who gives a tinkers damn if Spain or Germany or Turkey eats a nuke?

Never have liked the missile system but where is the sense in replacing intercontinental missiles with shorter range missiles….a missile is a missile…these just do not fly as far so we move them closer to Russia. We still have enough firepower to obliterate anyone a thousand times over. But what discourse is there with Russia and China? Reengage talking to them about what? The same things that they have done over the past 50 years and you think reengaging them is going to work? Global economy? Bull hockey. Global warming? Bigger pile of bull hockey. Stopping Iran’s nuclear ambitions? Pile of Bull dookey and smaller pile of donkey crap. Neither Russia or China is going to stop that..you know it and I know it. If I were Russia, I would move immediately on Poland and Georgia this very minute. No one will stop them. Certainly not us and Europe has no balls at all. If I were China, I would move on North and South Korea immediately. Japan can do nothing and neither will we and South Korea has enough resources to fight a 68 day full out war. We will wish to negotiate through the useless UN and both Russia and China have veto powers.

From that point on, neither of those countries have to do anything else. That entire region will be paralyzed and the entire hemisphere, including the resources will be divested.

Things could get very interesting very shortly and the economics of the world is not going to stop it.

Georgia is nothing except a pipeline access that Russia wants. It adds very little to the economic growth of Russia except for them to control the source and trans pipeline, and a deep water seaport that does not freeze. Russia does not need to invade Europe with an army…just control it with natural resources. Poland is nothing to Europe nor Russia economically….but it also has deep water seaports that do not freeze. Russia grabs Poland and Georgia and Europe drops dead…. and continues to buy their oil because there is no other source and Europe is not going to go any more green than their envy. Use Iran to control the mideast. China takes the Korea’s…does not hurt their economy, as you surmise…quite the opposite…..they end up controlling the vast majority of the wealth and resources…and short term hurt equals long term gain. They control and paralyze the China seas and the South China areas and Taiwan will fall into line within 5 years. I have seen this scenario already.

I do not know what they are waiting on. No one will fire a nuke. Korea will not. We will not. We will not intervene at all. Actually we can’t.

Want a conspiracy theory? Why are we still tied up in Afghanistan? I think we need an answer to this. The real answer. Why are we not spraying he poppy fields? Why are we not controlling the income to our enemies? We can do so very easily. We do not give a crap in hell about the peasants working the fields….so why are we not drying up the source of drugs in that area?

Yes. The fact was that after a really long day I was going to not write at all. I read his article and found it so amusing internally that he was able to actually post this article and think it made any sort of connection to the real world. So I figured I would offer it up to everyone for perusal. In hindsight after a bit of sleep, I may have been better off simply not writing last night, but it was a bit of a fun exercise tearing his argument apart.

Go to page 3 of this document. This will explain why inflation hasn’t attacked (yet).

The graph shows the huge and massive amount of excess reserves the banks have on hold with the FED. The banks have resisted lending money and instead have stuffed it into their “bank’s” account.

Now the rest of this document is idiotic. These bankers are trying to explain why the banks have done this. They claim it is because the FED is paying interest on that excess. They do not tell you that it is only 0.15% interest.

They do not explain why a bank would want to earn only 0.15% when they could buy T-bills @ 6%. Yet, the banks did not buy T-bills.

They do not explain why a bank would pay depositors up to 40x more interest than what the bank is earning at the FED.

These guys want ‘us’ to believe that the banks are getting a great deal at the FED. They do not explain this ‘great deal’ with any reasoning or common sense.

The graph is very compelling and scary. Their explanation is horribly lacking.

You’ve said before (I have it in my goldbug files 😉 ) that the gov’t will force the Fed to force the banks to release those reserves thus igniting the inflation. You also referenced a much higher unemployment rate — “unemployment (up to 30% – 40%) and business failures”. Mr. Williams at shadowstats says were around 21%, BLS says 9.7 in September using August data. The dollar index is down again today, gold is holding above 1K, the market rally continues with Mish suggesting it can go 1/3 higher. Are you willing to predict a tipping point?

A few interesting sidebars.

Tomorrow, Sept 18, the FDIC guarantee on money market funds expires. If I understand that correctly, it means that the cash sitting in brokerage/investment firms may move quickly and quantitatively to … commodities? equities? las vegas?

one of the Saudi families is in the hole to the tune of $9B, they were given a grace period that expires with Ramadan. (let me know if you want more details). What happens if a mideast sovereign fund collapses?

You’ve said before (I have it in my goldbug files 😉 ) that the gov’t will force the Fed to force the banks to release those reserves thus igniting the inflation.

I believe they will, or by the forces of economics, the banks will do it all by themselves.

They are losing their shirts – they have wages and rents to pay too. They have depositors demanding payments. They cannot earn enough @ 0.15% to cover this.

So, yes – inflation is our future.

You also referenced a much higher unemployment rate — “unemployment (up to 30% – 40%) and business failures”.

It will be very scary – it could be 50% — there is a huge mis-allocation of labor in the market place.

This will be corrected. What will happen politically? I do not know – what happens when 20 million unemployed people cannot feed their families?

Mr. Williams at shadowstats says were around 21%, BLS says 9.7 in September using August data. The dollar index is down again today, gold is holding above 1K, the market rally continues with Mish suggesting it can go 1/3 higher. Are you willing to predict a tipping point?

It may have happened already (China withdrawing gold reserves) – or it may happen tomorrow (no buyers of T-bills) – or may happen end of the month (Derivative contracts with China reneging ..) – and I may not even notice it…

But point is – if one is waiting for it before one prepares, you are like a passenger on the Titanic deciding to go to the life boats when all the boats have already left… too late.

A few interesting sidebars. Tomorrow, Sept 18, the FDIC guarantee on money market funds expires. If I understand that correctly, it means that the cash sitting in brokerage/investment firms may move quickly and quantitatively to … commodities? equities? las vegas? one of the Saudi families is in the hole to the tune of $9B, they were given a grace period that expires with Ramadan. (let me know if you want more details). What happens if a mideast sovereign fund collapses?

‘But point is – if one is waiting for it before one prepares, you are like a passenger on the Titanic deciding to go to the life boats when all the boats have already left… too late.’

I just keep wondering when the rest of the passengers are going to notice that disturbing tendency of the ship to tilt and what about that water anyway — that stuff is cold — saw an exhibit once where you could place your hand in a tub the same temperature as the water around the lifeboats. Many who escaped the ship froze in the water ….

NEW YORK — The Treasury Department said Thursday it will issue $112 billion in notes next week. A record $43 billion in 2-year notes will be sold on Tuesday, followed by $40 billion in 5-year debt on Wednesday. The final offering will be $49 billion in 7-year notes on Thursday. The amounts are each $1 billion more than last month — the most ever for each security — and in line with estimates of some of Wall Street’s biggest bond dealers. The government will also sell $85 billion in shorter-term bills. After the announcement, 2-year note yields, which move inversely to prices, remained up 1 basis point on the day, at 1%, the highest this month.

Jack of all trades, master of none. An old saying and an apt description of Obama in his first seven and a half months in office. The Obama team has tried to do much but has achieved perilously little and the size and speed of their undertakings are hurting their results.

Some telling examples of what this president has tried and results as of this week:

Ramming a huge “stimulus” bill through Congress in less than a month after taking office? Sure. However, quotes still have to be used around the word stimulus since only about 10% of the $787 billion has been actually spent, the rest is caught up in an elaborate web of red tape.

Attempting to overhaul the financial system without any concrete plans? Yes! Treasury Secretary Geithner resorted to cursing at FDIC and SEC heads Sheila Blair and Mary Shapiro, respectively, when they dared to question the Obama team’s strategy on this issue. This project is currently stalled notwithstanding another vague and downcast speech delivered by the president this week on Wall Street.

Reforming health care, 1/6th of our economy, in 6 weeks? According to Obama, why not?
The reason is that the American people are oversaturated by and are tired of:

– Proposals to push through broad and drastic changes with inordinate speed in order to deal with problems that need a nuanced approach.

– The skyrocketing deficit — predicted to reach $10 trillion if any one of the present health care bills is passed.

The president has now been forced to push the restart button by delivering a speech to a Joint Session of Congress to try to avoid an embarrassing defeat in his first year. The speech was characteristically full of broad statements and promises, “I will not sign any health care bill which adds as much as a dollar to the deficit,” but devoid of specifics. The administration wants to achieve drastic change as soon as possible, with no consideration for the dangers of such a shortsighted approach.

The list of unfinished and sloppy undertakings goes on: “cap-and-trade” climate change, drawdown in Iraq, the cyber-security bill, appointment of a slew of policy, “czars” and Cash for Clunkers are all programs that have either stalled out or, in the case of Cash for Clunkers and the czars have been executed so poorly it hurt the very purpose of the plan itself.

It is not just Republicans who are voicing concern with the frantic pace with which this President is seeking to govern, it is the Democrats as well. Democrats of all stripes are worried that the President’s agenda is “sucking the oxygen out” of their own legislative efforts while moderate, “blue dog” Democrats are concerned that if they continue to be pressured by the overly aggressive White House to vote for drastic change their stay in Washington DC will be cut short by the 2010 midterm elections. Those elections are speedily approaching and due in part to the actions of the administration will likely result in Republicans gaining significant ground in both houses of Congress.

The reason for these significant miscalculations is a word that Senator McCain repeated time and time again last fall: experience. Executive experience which this president lacks. President Obama is learning on the job and it shows.

The answer for this presidency is to slow down, to consider the approval ratings and realize that they do not have a blank check from the American public and that their political capital tank is getting closer and closer to running empty. The answer is to pick an issue, concentrate and become a master of it, take time to work with legislators on both sides of the aisle and come to a sensible solution that will not result in millions of people coming out to scream their displeasure.
This President still has an opportunity to enact some of the change he spoke of so often during the campaign, he just has to realize that change does not, and should not, come at a frantic pace.

Talk radio this morning was going on and on about Obama doing five shows this weekend, being campaigner-in-chief, when he should be meeting with the senators and congressmen to hammer out a bill on health care. I am not sure he doesn’t have a workable plan. If he can sway public opinion, and get enough voters backing him, those up for re-election would feel comfortable to
follow Obama’s plan. He is going around the senators and congressmen, direct to their voter base.

My question is, is he president, or an actor who is trying to push his new movie? Wait, never mind, I forgot who I was talking about.

I doubt if he can really get the backing he needs. Heck, even Reid said that the plan is not good for us here in Nevada. Read that on the Fox Web site. I was quite shocked when I read that too. Thought the bill was good for everbody.

Calling health insurance reform a “defining struggle of this generation,” President Obama told thousands of college students Thursday that Congress must resist scare tactics and false accusations to do a makeover.

The fight will be difficult, Obama said, but an “unprecedented coalition” of hospitals, doctors, nurses and drug makers support the effort. Some of the most enthusiastic backers, he told loudly cheering students at the University of Maryland, “are the very medical professionals who have firsthand knowledge” of how badly the current system operates.

“When I sign this bill, it will be against the law for insurance companies to drop your coverage when you get sick,” the president said.

Obama again called for a public insurance option, which most congressional Republicans, and some Democrats, oppose. It would not amount to “a government takeover of health care,” he said. Obama stopped short of insisting on such a plan.

Eliminating “waste and abuse” in the Medicare and Medicaid programs will help the government find money to cover most of the Americans now without insurance, he said.

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., has introduced a bill that would rein in spiraling medical costs and require nearly everyone to carry health insurance. A vote in his committee could occur as early as next week, but many hurdles remain in both the House and Senate.

I understand that 65% of doctors are against this bill, and I also understand that the other 40% will close their practices, and find another line of work, or just do something completely different. Don’t know what doctors he’s talking to that are for his bill.

As governments around the globe struggle to contain high deficits, companies and executives are bracing for higher taxes. And increasingly they are turning to Switzerland for relief, according to BusinessWeek.

Swiss cantons (administrative districts) are openly and legally urging multinationals to relocate. This fall, U.S. fast-food giant McDonald’s will move its European headquarters to Geneva from London, joining Kraft Foods, Yahoo! and Nissan, all in an effort to take advantage of Switzerland’s lower corporate taxes. Other incentives include a highly skilled workforce, leading universities, and strong intellectual property laws.

* In contrast with Britain, Ireland and the United States where tax increases are inevitable, Switzerland has no plans to raise taxes.

A point you and I have made to our left leaning friends, Switzerland was moving toward socialism, and destroying their economy. They have now reversed course and are reaping the rewards, while the USA seems hellbent on doing what others have shown to not work.

I’m in brackets: And if that’s the most disturbing thing you’ve seen me say, you haven’t been reading all of my posts, so here you go: Obama ain’t so bad [he’s more useless than the last moron; at least Bush could get his party in line]

It matters not one wit who sits in the chair – they are all bad.

They are men who believe they know about you than you do.

, welfare is good[necessary is a better word than good]

Welfare is merely distribution of the proceeds of theft, hence, is a consequence of an act of evil.

It is not necessary – indeed, it must be ended.

, some amount socialism isn’t bad either[agree]

Socialism destroys economic calculation. Without economic calculation, resources in an economy cannot be optimally distributed. This results in massive waste and economic failure.

Socialism – in any form – damages the economy, and destroys prosperity, increasing poverty.

, Keynes right about a lot of things, you can’t solve all the world’s problems with military occupation[check]

He was a very articulate and brilliant man.

However, his treatise The General Theory on Money is rambling, inarticulate and incomprehensible. Of course, this is the basis of economic policy for most of the world’s government.

, abortion isn’t murder[it is murder, but that should be the woman’s choice anyway]

So women have a right to murder because they are women???

, religion (especially organized religion) is dangerous[check]

Institutionalized anything is almost always dangerous.

Institutionalized spirituality (religion) destroys the spirit.

Institutionalized freedom (government) destroys freedom.

, right wing lunatics are every bit as bad and plentiful as left wing lunatics[check],

Since they are the same thing – Statists – this is self-evident.

Obama was born in Hawaii[check]

I doubt it, it hasn’t been proven, but it does not matter.

, 9/11 wasn’t an inside job but could have been prevented[don’t agree;

It was an inside job – WTC 7 proves it.

nobody would’ve seen that coming

Everybody saw it coming – it was willful blindness.

/and it was Clinton’s lack of response that encouraged them to try it]

For now, I will just say this as a simple statement of my opinion (which I will attempt to back up with arguments next time): A “thing” that is genetically a member of the Homo Sapiens Sapiens species, is a human (with all attendant rights and obligations) only when that “thing” may want such for itself.

So if a person is unable to ‘want’ it – by disease or accident – they have no rights?

What happens if they are cured? They get them back? So in between – they had no rights and could be plundered justly?

. Does that mean that a brain-dead coma patient is a human? No. It is a piece of meat kept animate by machinery. Does that mean we get to just pull the plug at will? No. The person, the thing that made them a person (ie their conscious mind), is dead. As such, their body becomes someone else’s possession.

No, it does not become someone else’s possession. They do not lose their rights when they are unable to exercise their rights.

What happens is that their rights are expressed and protected by Guardians whose responsibility is to make the best decision on behalf of, not in place of, that person.

That person may decide whether to pull the plug or not. Let’s take it a step further. What if the person has severe dementia. If the person is still aware of their own existence (and just how does one establish this? I would suggest erring on the side of caution), then they still are a person, but if not (as my grandfather was for many years after being diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease), he is not a person anymore.

This is a dangerous suggestion – since humanity becomes a medical test. This is the exact same strategy that genocide derives from – that there exists ‘sub-human’ or ‘almost-human’ classes and thus, do not have ‘human’ rights.

Great evil is growing seeds in this concept.

Does that mean that I should be able to euthanize my grandfather? Absolutely. I wish I could have. He died many years before he died, he spent the last few years of his “life” staring at a blank wall while his body degenerated. My grandfather was funny and interesting and I loved him, but this thing was not my grandfather, just his mortal remains – he was long gone.

Such subjective analysis allows for great evil to grow.

No man has a right to judge the life of another – it does not matter what You think his life is like, it is not Your Life.

As soon as you can justify your judgment of another’s life in a manner by which you can take another life – all human life is in critical danger of arbitrary decisions.

It is the mind that makes us different, the mind which separates us from the animals. This, and this alone, sets us apart.

All animals have a mind. That is not unique in any way.

Cheetahs are faster, bears are stronger, fish swim better, eagles see better, sharks smell better (have a better sense of smell), dogs hear better, cat fish taste better (have a better sense of taste and are delicious). In every category, we are surpassed by nature except for one. We are the smart ones. We think. That is why our lives are sacrosanct. If it were anything else, then animals would be more than human, their lives more sacrosanct than ours.

So, because I am smarter than you, gives me the right to judge your life and decide whether or not you are human.

This is the essence of your argument.

I suggest you will think this to be very dangerous now that I have presented it back to you.

So is a fetus entitled to it’s life? No. It is not aware of its own existence. It cannot think. It has no brain. It lacks the fundamental thing which is essential to being human.

If you call it “not human”, then what is it?

A baby is aware, it reacts to its environment – so, for that matter, does a late stage fetus. They are humans. A multi-cellular blob, regardless of its DNA, is not.

In fact, you are incorrect.

The zygote is in constant reaction to its environment.

It is under massive manipulation of hormones and it responds to those hormones (and other effects) constantly.

, I hope you will join me in favoring the rights of human women infected by parasites with human DNA over the rights of a few cells

To justify the killing of another human life so to avoid a self-created consequence is the essence of human evil.

Thank you BF, I said a few things above to Mathius as well. Although worded differently,I think, I feel we are on the same wave length here. I can’t imagine how anyone can think that way. I think you know where I stand on certain issues, and abortion is one of those issues I will speak my mind on.

I also want to thank you for your comments last night, and to say what a lesson I learned from you and JAC. You two really helped me out, and I very much appreciate it.

If they lose their ability to think (self-awareness) due to accident or disease they are not a person? Yes, this is the same as getting killed by disease or run over by a minivan. Dead means dead.

What if they could be cured? Are they dead in the meantime and should be treated as such? No, I would stipulate that the condition would need to be permanent. This seems a fair caveat.

“What happens is that their rights are expressed and protected by Guardians whose responsibility is to make the best decision on behalf of, not in place of, that person.” No. They are dead. Their brain, the thing which endows them with the ability to hold rights, is gone, thus rights are forfeit. As with our conversation the other day, you can’t take it with you. Your body (the sack of meat that’s left behind) is someone else’s property. Again, this would be conditioned on permanent loss of self-awareness.

“Great evil is growing seeds in this concept.” One cannot perform evil on a thing. A body without a mind is not a person. I see where you acquire a slippery slope argument here by suggest that no brain could be used to justify “inferior” brain. But I have been pretty clear that any sense of self or desire for self preservation etc should be sufficient. The cutoff I draw is somewhere around the IQ of an insect, not a a high bar.

“No man has a right to judge the life of another – it does not matter what You think his life is like, it is not Your Life. As soon as you can justify your judgment of another’s life in a manner by which you can take another life – all human life is in critical danger of arbitrary decisions.” This is no arbitrary decision. And there is no life to take. He was not alive. A body can be dead and we can keep the heart beating indefinitely with machinery, does that mean the person “lives” for hundreds of years? No, I reject your assertion that the thing staring at the wall was, in fact, my grandfather. People are not bodies, we are minds which inhabit bodies. My grandfather was long dead when he “died.” I wish it weren’t the case – I could have had another decade to get to know him better.

“All animals have a mind. That is not unique in any way.” Agreed, and exactly my point. We have minds, but ours are superior. This is what sets us apart. If not this, then tell me what? Anatomically we’re nearly identical to chimps. Why, therefore, are we superior?

“So, because I am smarter than you, gives me the right to judge your life and decide whether or not you are human. This is the essence of your argument.” Absolutely not. That you are smart (and I do not stipulate that you are smarter than me), is irrelevant. I suggest merely a threshold beyond which you must pass in order to hold rights. Having passed that point (being self-aware) grants you inalienable rights. It is a one or a zero. You are aware and are human, or you are not and are not. Again, I set the bar very, very low, so only a small pile of cells or someone with a completely destroyed brain can fail this test.

“If you call it “not human”, then what is it?” A small pile of cells or a sack of meat dependent on size.

“The zygote is in constant reaction to its environment. It is under massive manipulation of hormones and it responds to those hormones (and other effects) constantly.” So does an amoeba. It is not a human. The reactivity must be a conscious choice. A brick will “react” to it’s environment if it is dropped off of a building.

“To justify the killing of another human life so to avoid a self-created consequence is the essence of human evil.” Fair enough, but for this, I would have to recognize that they are human, which they are not. When the time comes that my brain has completely failed me, I would hope someone makes this decision for me and doesn’t feel bad about it. Because, I will we dead even if my heart is still beating.

And now, a question. If scientists could take your brain and insert it into a brand new body, which would be you? The now brainless body kept alive by machinery or the new one housing your consciousness? Would it be objectionable to “kill” the body? By your definition, it is human.

You stated, “. . . I would have to recognize that they are human, which they are not.” Ce n’est pas vous qui décide, Dieu merci! (Thank God you are not the one who gets to decide this!)

You are not the first person to decide that a living person is not human. History is full of examples. Jews were exterminated because they were “subhuman,” Africans were enslaved because they were “subhuman,” and so forth. Being human or not human is an objective fact. We may not like the appearance, actions, or needs of a particular human. That doesn’t make him or her not human.

Perhaps he or she is a human not yet able to care for himself or herself.

Perhaps he or she is a human no longer able to care for himself or herself.

However, he or she is still a human and is either alive or dead based upon objective facts, not opinion based upon feelings/thoughts such as “My relative doesn’t act the same as he/she used to.”

I sincerely hope that neither you nor I, nor any of our loved ones, has to suffer what your grandfather did (or what my mother still does suffer). We have thought her to be just about gone so many times. And she bounces back. And she still knows us. But if/when she no longer knows us, she will still be alive until she is dead.

Is Franks stupid? Will the media report this? Is this what keeps getting him re-elected?

“Johnson’s bill has 51 co-sponsors, including some of the most liberal members of the House, like Reps. Dennis Kucinich, John Conyers, Bobby Rush, Steve Cohen, and Barbara Lee. Given the Democrats’ tremendous numerical superiority in the House, if the majority wants to expand CRA, Republicans will be unable to stop it.”

I liked how fox put the names and pictures of the seven senators that voted against cutting off ACORN’s funding up in several reports. Maybe they will do this for these commies come election time.

BF, I’ve been referred to as insane on a few too many occasions, but it serves me well! I’ve been getting ready since Spring was just getting under way, and the plans are in progress, but for the most part, I’m set (just want to whack a few deer, and learn how to make my own beer!)

So few of us have horses & plows …. and I don’t personally know any Amish to move in with. I know inflation would destroy savings; is there any way to really prepare for every “worst case scenario”?

Worse case, no.
You will die.

Less than worse case, yes.
Understand the difference between wealth, money and currency. Inflation destroys currency. Therefore, do not hold currency – hold money or wealth.

Gold, land, cars, furniture, etc. are all wealth. Gold is also (traditionally) money. Oil could be considered money today too.

My guess is no one even knows what all the scenarios would be, much less how to prepare.

We do not need to know how fast a ship will sink, nor the attitude of the ship will be at when its sinking or how many pieces it may break up into while sinking — to know the ship is sinking and we should get into a life boat.

And of course there are events, government meddling, terrorist attacks, and other potential “wild cards” that could impact things.

True – but all this does is either speed up or slow down the sinking. But the ship will still sink.

I cannot tell you when inflation will hit – I am telling inflation will hit.

It seems like economists are currently arguing whether it will be inflation or deflation next – inflation b/c of the conditions you described (too much money in the economy) and deflation b/c of the upcoming crashes and corrections to bubbles.

Any economist who is claiming massive deflation is a crack-pot. He does not understand money and currency at all.

The economy will go into inflation – maybe high inflation – and will continue as long as the government continues to print digital money.

If they print too much or too fast, we will get hyper-inflation.

When the government stops printing money – and one day they will have to stop or we will get hyper-inflation, and that will end western civilization – the economy will tank into a Depression as the economy absorbs the excess production. While the excess production is being absorbed, there is no current production. (Why build a new car when last year’s car still has not sold?) As production stops, there are massive job layoffs and very high unemployment as the economy moves capital from money losing business to sustainable business. This could take decades. A Depression is not deflation.

Deflation occurs when currency is being withdrawn out of an economy. This makes the currency more valuable TOMORROW then today. This creates an incentive to save – which increases capital available for business – which creates jobs – which creates a sustainable economy.

Inflation helps debtors at the cost to savers.
Deflation helps savers at the cost to debtors.

Guess which one is sustainable and increases prosperity (improves efficiency and production) and which one does not.

You said “We will suffer (hopefully, because the alternative is deadly) high inflation for a decade, then a depression for a couple of decades, then a return to solid prosperity.” Dent’s cycles predict 10-13 years of depression (deflation) then about 20 of gradual inflation (growth/stability). Can you please help me understand why you believe in the conditions and timetable you outlined as opposed to what Dent suggests

What basis does a deflationist claim currency will be withdrawn from the economy? When has this ever occurred in the last 75 years since the creation of the FED? Answer: they have no basis and it has never been done.

We are in a depression and slight deflation – because banks are not relending the money people have paid to pay of old loans. This money is being stuffed into the Reserves, and thus removed from the economy. HoweverIt has not been de-created!

It sits as a horrible potential to be reintroduced back into the economy instantly – without any FED or government involvement.

Government is spending rapidly trillions of newly created digital money directly into the economy. This is very inflationary.

We are seeing inflation in food prices today – because food does not inventory very well (it rots). So its purchases are very close to near-term and as such, its prices are a good proxy for an economy. Sugar, for example, has gone up 48% in price.

Things like cars and toasters do inventory very well (they do not rot), and there still is a large inventory of unsold hard goods. These are still priced before inflation. When these are gone, inflation will hit their replacements.

On top of this, banks will need to start lending – adding more currency back into the economy and accelerate the inflation rate.

As some point, inflation will risk going out of control and the FED will stop it with a “Bang”.
This will cause a Depression.

Depending on the depth and length of the inflationary spiral will create the length and depth of the Depressionary spiral.

A depression is necessary to correct the economy. When the depression eases, I expect sound money to be in place and the economy may become sustainably prosperous. But at that point, I’m merely guessing.

“We are in a depression and slight deflation – because banks are not relending the money people have paid to pay of old loans. This money is being stuffed into the Reserves, and thus removed from the economy. HoweverIt has not been de-created! It sits as a horrible potential to be reintroduced back into the economy instantly – without any FED or government involvement.”

Thank you for taking time to answer my questions. I have a couple of clarifying ones, if you’d be so kind:

Who would suddenly decide to instantaneously reintroduce this money? A group of banks OR someone(s) super-wealthy who could dump a bunch of money in the system for ill-intent? Or…?

Is there any way for the government to de-create the fiat money they have printed?

Left wing Democrats from New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd to former President Jimmy Carter are chiming in to proclaim that critics of President Obama’s policies are racists. Those making such unsubstantiated claims are revealing that they have no substantive response to the arguments of the critics and so are just resorting to name-calling.

President Obama’s left wing allies have become increasingly hysterical after the president’s nationally televised address last Wednesday to a Joint Session of Congress failed to ignite increased public support for his proposed government takeover of health care. The most recent polls show still increasing majorities opposing the president’s plan.

In my American Spectator column yesterday at I explain how the president’s address last Wednesday was filled with numerous misleading falsehoods. Over the past couple of days The Wall Street Journal and others have documented further false and misleading statements in that speech. But instead of responding substantively to these criticisms, President Obama’s allies have resorted to slandering all the critics as racists. The deceptive campaign for the health overhaul and the non-substantive name-calling response to critics is only further alienating public majorities, as the polls show.

We see the exact same problem on other issues, such as global warming and proposed cap-and- trade legislation to counter it. The advocates of man-caused global warming and cap-and-trade have already admitted that they can’t defend their positions in debate. But they continue to advocate their positions with name calling and sneering at opponents.

At the same time, we see evidence of inappropriate racial considerations in the policies of the Obama administration. Career prosecutors at the Justice Department brought charges against a unit of the Black Panthers after they engaged in egregious voter intimidation tactics during the 2008 elections — displaying weapons and insulting white voters. But even after these prosecutors had won in court, the Obama Justice Department dropped all charges.

Similarly, after a crowd of black students severely beat a white student on a school bus in Belleville, Mo. a couple of days ago, the Obama Justice Department has shown no interest in opening an investigation. As The National Review commented yesterday:

“If the races were reversed, there is no doubt that the Civil Rights Division under Acting Assistant Attorney General Loretta King would already have issued a press release about its intent to probe the beating and pursue a possible hate-crimes prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §245.”

While I agree he is a “Founder” in the true sense, they are celebrating the “founding” of the Constitution. Jefferson didn’t work on the Constitution, except in his prior influence on Madison, Franklin and others.

My grandfather, as I said, stared blankly at a wall for several years, that is not “living” – there is a substantive difference.

…substantive difference…for you You forgot that last part, Matt.

Since it is not your life, however, your opinion on whether it is substantive or not is irrelevant.

You most certainly can create a living will which you can demand the end of your life under the circumstance you chose.

But you have no right to make that determination on another person.

For if you do claim such a right, then others will claim that right for you. You will be very disappointed with that result.

That said, I did misspeak (mistype) when I said have a brain. Yes, they have begin developing a “brain” at an extremely early age, but it is a while before it could match the intelligence of your average rodent. A blob of cells is not a person.

Yes, they are if those cells are human being.
And, again, you chose intellect as a measure of person.

1) As my intellect is measurably superior, I am the superior judge of humanity.

“For if you do claim such a right, then others will claim that right for you. You will be very disappointed with that result.” Slippery slop arguments are irrelevant. At the difference is that it crosses the threshold I have spelled out. The fact that he is not aware of his own existence is key. Legally a living will is one thing, I am discussing morality (you frequently use this trick in reverse), law is one thing, ethics another – I make no claim to the relevant laws. I have no right because he is my grandfather. His body would become the possession of my grandmother. The choice is hers. If it were my wife who had experienced brain death (god forbid), then her body would be my property just as her bank account would be and anything else she happened to own. Because, on the death of her brain, she would cease to be a person.

And again, you deliberately ignore that I make no claim to the superiority of a person. It is a threshold, as I said above, if you are aware of yourself you are a human, if not then not. If you are a person, you are equal to all other people under the terms of this discussion. I do not grant smarter people more power.

And again, I reject your assertion that your intellect is measurably superior. Though, I do enjoy the challenge you present.

You’re welcome to come and try to get my car, but I’m going to consciously oppose that (and I don’t have a house yet.. working on it). However, you’d be welcome to stop by for a pitcher of beer and a long discussion of the subject. Might be a long drive though..

This is mostly off topic but just came across and had to share. For those who don’t understand the issues affecting our forest mgt (federal, state and private) this will leave you concluding the Obama Administration is being reasonable and visionary.

Only problem is: 1) Bush II changed the direction of the USFS to one of “restoration” 8 years ago. and 2) Nothing will change without addressing all the underlying laws that prevent the USFS and BLM from getting work done on federal lands. The speech does not mention a single one of these.

In fact, the Obama admin has pulled back a couple of Bush II initiatives that could have helped.

Oh there is the other little thing. It is the role of the U.S. Congress to establish the purpose of the federal forests and to determine what the mission of the managing agency is supposed to be. This is just one small example of the Executive branch assuming powers delegated to the legislative branch. Meanwhile the legislative sits on its hands and does nothing to regain control.

I lived in MA for 2 years and hiked through the woods to find massive 4′ wide stone walls running straight as an arrow. The surrounding trees were easily over 100 years old.

I lived in New Jersey for a dozen years. 100 year old photos of the hills showed grass land. It is now forest almost as thick as jungle.

I live now on the western slope of the Sierras in CA. Yesterday, I was looking at an 1849 photo of the town. The hills above had a few trees but was mostly grass land. Today it is pine forest. The last saw mill in our county closed this spring. The logging industry is almost gone here. So now the forest service pays for thinning instead of getting paid.

The forrest service is closing roads and trails in the Sierras that people have been using for generations to go camping, fishing, and hunting. Motor vehicles are no longer allowed and are blocked by boulders. When the fires start, the ground crews are blocked, so the fire gets larger.

We have more forrest land in this country now than a century ago. We listened to the save the trees crowd and now are doomed to lose the forest.

I heard on the news today on the way home from work, that now this administration wants to take control of student loans. Didn’t hear the whole story, that’s all I got. Has anybody else here hear that story? Can’t find anything on it anywhere.

Is this what you meant when you called me you bellwether? If not, would you please clarify what you meant. I don’t think I would like to wear a bell around my neck BF. Besides, I’m not a ram. A castrated one at that sir.

This article is about bellwethers in general. For Connie Willis’ book, see Bellwether (novel).

A bellwether is any entity in a given arena that serves to create or influence trends or to presage future happenings.

The term is derived from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) leading its flock of sheep.[1][2] The movements of the flock could be noted by hearing the bell before the flock was in sight.

Ms. Willis’ Bellwether is a wonderful novel. She has a unique voice, handles comedy as neatly as she does tragedy, and displays a true gift with farce. My favorite of her work is ‘To Say Nothing of the Dog’. FYI, BF she used the titanic sinking in one book – sorry the title escapes me — it was one of her darker works, and I prefer her farce… just thinking

ANYBODY WHO BELIEVES THAT ABORTION IS NOT MURDER, I CHALLANGE YOU TO WATCH A PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION OR PLAIN ABORTION, STAND THERE AND WATCH THEM CRUSH THE BONES OF THE WEE ONE WHO HAS DONE NOTHING IN THIS IDIOT WORLD TO BE KILLED FOR. I CHALLANGED OBAMA AS HE CANCELLED BUSHES BAN ON PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION, IT IS EVEN AGAINST THE LAW TO HELP A BABY WHO HAS BEEN ABORTED, BUT LIVED THRU IT, A NURSE ON FOX TOLD THIS STORY, A DOWNS SYNDROME BABY WAS ABORTED, BUT LIVED, DOCTOR TOSSED IN A DIRTY SINK AND SO-CALLED MOTHER AND FATHER, DOCTOR ALL LEFT THE WEE ONE TO DIE. SHE KNOWING SHE WOULD LOSE HER JOB IF SHE USED MEDICAL HELP, JUST PICKED THE BABY UP AND HELD IT CLOSE UNTIL IT DIED, OH LORD, TO SAY ABORTION IS GOOD IS SHEER UTTER CRAP. I WISH SARAH PALIN WAS OUR PRESIDENT INSTEAD OF THIS CRAPPY FOOL.

SOME OF THE COMMENTS ON THIS SITE NOW ARE QUITE OVRE MY HEAD. AS AN 85 YEAR OLD VETERAN OF WW2, U.S. MARINE CORPS. I SEEM TO BE ONLY INTERESTED IN THE DAMAGE THIS PERSON IN WHITE HOUSE IS DOING AND HE IS DOING A LOT. TO CANCEL THE BAN ON PARTIAL BIRTH ABORTION IS ONE, THE OTHER IS TO KEEP MESSING WITH USA DEFENSES, INTELLIGENCE OFFICES AND HE JUST KEEP LYING, LYING, LYING. NO MATTER WHAT YOU FELLOWS THINK, THIS PERSON ID AN ALLEGED MUSIM-PRESIDENT, NOT AFRICAN AMERICAN, MARTIN LUTHER KING SAID TO JUDGE BY CHARACTER NOT BY SKIN COLOR, I SAY HE HAS NO CHARACTER, DID YOU SEE THE PICTURE OF HIM AFTER THE BEER FEST ON WHITE HOUSE LAWN WHERE THE PROFESSOR AND WHITE COP WERE WALKING, THE PROFESSOR A “FRIEND” OF OBAMA, IS DISABLED, OBAMA WALKS AHEAD AS A CONQUEROR SHOULD, THE PROFESSOR HAVING DIFFICULTY WALKING, WHO HELPS HIM, THE WHITE COP. HE IS THE BIGGEST FOOL, AND AS MUCH AS I RESPECT THE OVAL OFFICE, I DO NOT RESPECT THE IDIOT IN IT NOW. CLINTON WAS BAD ENOUGH, BUT THIS ONE TAKES THE CARE, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. I CARE ABOUT USA, I CARE ABOUT BABIES, I TRY NOT TO KILL ANYTHING, AND YES I BELIEVE IN OUR LORD AND SAVIOR, JESUS CHRIST AND WHOEVER SAID RELIGION IS EVIL, I DO NOT COMPLAIN BECAUSE WE ALL HAVE CHOICES, AND MY CHOICE IS TO LOVE AND BELIEVE MY SAVIOR. YOUR CHOICE IS YOUR BUSINESS, BUT IN TIME WE WILL SEE WHO WINS.